Open jhnwllr opened 1 year ago
Just a thought - should the vocabulary be hierarchical?
First thoughts...
I think the previous arguments about avoiding "error types" still hold. https://github.com/gbif/occurrence-annotation/issues/14
So only PRESENT would be hierarchical.
PRESENT
NATIVE
INTRODUCED
MANAGED
FORMER
VAGRANT
OTHER
ABSENT
SUSPICIOUS
Examples:
PRESENT
+ NATIVE
("I have good knowledge about this species and it is native in this polygon")
PRESENT
+ NULL
("I know it occurs in Germany but I don't know if it's NATIVE or INTRODUCED")
ABSENT
("I am absolutely sure this species has never and will never occur in Antarctica")
ABSENT
("I am certain this tree cannot grow on top of this mountain")
SUSPICIOUS
("I am fairly certain the country centroid of Australia is a suspicious location for this taxa")
SUSPICIOUS
+ DATASETKEY
("Occurrences in this location for this dataset are suspicious, although other occurrences from other datasets might be ok")
I think expanding the controlled vocab to include
will useful. There are some cases where "NATIVE" doesn't make sense or is not known, but it is known that it is "PRESENT".